Capture COS/WIP

This thread was started because a topic in another was divergent from the original…

@andrew -

If you ran the Capt COS/WIP process, it would make GL entries for all 25K pages of transactions.

Now the “good news”… It wont make an individual GL Tran for each Part Transaction in your 25K pages. It summarizes all those Part Trans into a “single” GL tran. I quoted “single” as its a single group of Trans with a single GL TRan liine for each Account hit.

For example, take the following WIP/Recon report results

That shows 5 transactions (3 PUR-STK, 1 STK-CUS, and 1 AR Invoice).
(There are 10 lines because each tran has a line for the Debit, and another line for the Credit.)

The summary combines the debits for each account and Credits for each. And results with:


So instead of a GL Line for each tran, it would make a GL Tran with just 3 lines for accts 1151, 3324, and 6378. And it only creates a single Credit or debit bassed on the difference of the summary. Form the summary above,

  • 1151 (Inventory) would get a $932 Debit (2,166 - 1,234)
  • 3324 (Accrued Rec) would get a $2,166 Credit (0 - 2,166)
  • 6378 (COS - Parts) would get a $1,234 Debit (1,234 - 0)

Note that the total of the debit equals the total of the credits

After the Capture COS/WIP is posted, the GL Report would show a rather cryptic “Periodic Posting Process”. This is the net of the summary for the specific account

While this looks like you’d have no way of determining which transactions the “Periodic Posting Process” was for, you actually can. By using the WIP Recon report and entering the Journal Code and Number:

The resulting WIP Recon output will show all the trans that used in the GL Entry.

NOTE: the images of the GL Report is not from the example tarns above

1 Like

Something to note is that the Capture COS/WIP process will create a “Periodic Posting Process” journal entry for each Apply Date you have transactions on. So if you run it for a long period of time you can still end up with a few dozen or a few hundred journal entries for each apply date.


Good catch. We run it daily, so I’m used to seeing one “PPP” entry per each Capt COS/WIP.

Do you know if “older trans” (unposted ones, from closed periods) rollup into a single PPP entry?

Like if there were unposted PUR-STK trans that were entered on 4/5 (after Period 3 was closed), with a receipt date of 3/29, and another for 3/30.

And then the Cap COS/WIP is run with the “Capture Outdated Trans” options selected and Outdated Apply date of 4/1.

Would that make 1 entry with a date of 4/1, combining the two outdated PUR-STK Trans?

Or make 2 entries, each with a date of 4/1, and each for the specific “Received dates” (3/29 and 3/30)?

1 Like

@ckrusen, thanks for the detail. That is a REALLY helpful synopsis, and the conversation is going in the exact direction I was hoping for… specifically, how does the rollup look… what about period breaks…
Obviously, any summarization is welcome, but given we went live on 1/1/2014, there will be lots of period breaks. Obviously this is something I’ll have an answer to when I’ve tested, but perhaps @tsmith will have info to share re: your question.

Take the time to read the Help for Capture COS/WIP, and do some testing. Testing is hard, because once you run it, you need to make new Transactions to test it again.

Even if the Cap COS/WIP process does generate hundreds or even thousands of “Periodic Posting Process” entries, They would all be for the same Period (assuming the prior periods are closed). So you could still use the Summary from the WIP Recon report to “undo” the GL Trans that Cap COS/WIP did.


Interesting! My gut reaction was that it would be rolled up into one GL entry, but you end up with one for each date (at least…when I initially tried it, I was getting multiple dates per journal but still got multiple journal entries). When I tried with only two transfers it was easier to see:

After posting outdated transactions with an apply date of 4/1: (Only the highlighted rows are important. The others are from different rollups I’ve done in Test)

WIP report after posting (for the transfers dated 3/30):

1 Like

Interesting discussion. Our system has always posted an entry for every detail line and not a summary entry for each day. We are on Version 9 so I don’t know if that makes a difference. Is there a setting somewhere that controls this?


1 Like

I think we might not be considering “summary” to mean the same thing. Because I’m pretty sure that V8 did the “summary” thing…

And my definition of “summary” is to combine the credits and debits for various part tran types, for the same GL account, as long as they have the same date. (I originally thought it would combine dates too, but @tsmith showed otherwise).

If I run Cap COS/WIP just once a week, I should get a maximum of 5 (or 7 if you do trans on the weekend) PPP entries per GL account. Regardless of how many part transactions happen.

1 Like

It’s a setting in the COS/WIP posting rules that determines if the transactions are summarized or posted verbatim. This tripped up our accountants after our upgrade to E10 since it started summarizing the transactions and we had had it set to not summarize in E9.


So with Summarize disabled, 100 STK-MFG part trans (all with the same date), would make 100 “PPP” GL entries when Cap COS/WIP is processed?

But with summarize enabled, it would make 1 “PPP” GL entry when Cap COS/WIP is processed?

1 Like

Thanks Tyler. I see a setting in there for it I think but I won’t mess with it in production until I see what it does in test. It was probably set that way during our implementation for testing and then never put back.

1 Like


1 Like

It would require making a copy of the Posting Rule Revision and then changing that value. I wouldn’t suggest doing this unless you’re comfortable working with the posting engine and you thoroughly test in a Test database.


Yes, I treat the posting rules like kryptonite. I try to stay away at all costs. We’ll probably get some consulting help in here before we try it. I’m only a lowly financial guy. :slight_smile:


Wow. It seems this was a discussion well worth having.

I’ll add the posting rules to my testing next week in order to determine the best way forward. It seems to me that, if the tweak does exist in the posting rules, I may be able to heavily summarize for my initial capture, then relax it a bit going forward - I think we’d do weekly, in order to keep an eye on it, then settle into monthly runs.

Don’t sell yourself short Tim!